Is Congress Trying To Kill American Innovation Through Patent Reform?

In his 2011 State of the Union address, President Barack Obama,
touting U.S. innovation, research and development, called on
Americans to "win the future." This, he said, is "our
generation's
Sputnik moment."

It now looks like a key driver of innovation could now be at
risk.

A new bill - the America
Invents Act (formerly the Patent Reform Act of 2011) -is
making its way through Congress. It would change America's
inventor-friendly patent system to favor whoever files for an
application first.

As Clyde Prestowitz, writing on his blog at Foreign
Policy, points out, America's penchant for invention is due
in large part to its patent system, which grants the original
inventor patent rights even if another person or corporation
files for the patent first.

This is very helpful to individual inventors and small companies
because it gives them time to test the viability and commercial
potential of their inventions. It also protects them from those
big corporations or others who might hear of their invention and
rush to be first to patent it.

Obviously, it's simpler to award patents to the first person that
files an application, regardless of whether or not they are the
original inventor. As Prestowitz points out, the new act also
obviously favors big corporations who can file patents as soon as
they hear about a new invention.

The bill would also give foreign inventors an advantage over
Americans. Via Prestowitz:

A German inventor files for a patent in Europe and then, under a
bi-lateral treaty, a bit later for the same patent in the United
States. Shortly afterward, an American files for a U.S. patent on
a similar (not identical) invention. Under the proposed new
legislation, the German application would be considered prior art
that would block issuance of a U.S. patent to the American
applicant. But the reverse situation would not block issuance of
a European patent to the German applicant.

Prestowitz goes on to urge Congress and Obama to kill the bill,
arguing that, in this instance, efficiency and expediency should
be sacrificed to save entrepreneurialism.